IJCPE Vol.8 No.

4 (December 2007) 31


Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering
Vol.8 No.4 (December 2007) 31-37
ISSN: 1997-4884
Prediction of Fractional Hold-Up in RDC Column
Using Artificial Neural Network
Adel Al-Hemiri and Suhayla Akkar
Chemical Engineering Department - College of Engineering - University of Baghdad - Iraq
Abstract
In the literature, several correlations have been proposed for hold-up prediction in rotating disk contactor. However,
these correlations fail to predict hold-up over wide range of conditions. Based on a databank of around 611
measurements collected from the open literature, a correlation for hold up was derived using Artificial Neiral Network
(ANN) modeling. The dispersed phase hold up was found to be a function of six parameters: N,
c
v ,
d
v , ,
d c
/ ,
. Statistical analysis showed that the proposed correlation has an Average Absolute Relative Error (AARE) of 6.52%
and Standard Deviation (SD) 9.21%. A comparison with selected correlations in the literature showed that the
developed ANN correlation noticeably improved prediction of dispersed phase hold up. The developed correlation also
shows better prediction over a wide range of operation parameters in RDC columns.
Keywords: dispersed phase hold up, RDC, artificial neural networks (ANN).
Introduction
In the design and scale up of RDC, it is necessary to
explore the hydrodynamic behavior, mass transfer
mechanism, and hold up effect within the equipment
under different operating conditions. Dispersed phase
hold up represents the total drop population in RDC
column is defined as the ratio of dispersed phase to the
volume of the column. The effect of the hold up on the
performance of an extraction column is the most
important hydrodynamic characteristic, because hold up
is related to the interfacial area between the phases by:
32
6
d
x
a (1)
Where x is the dispersed phase hold up and
32
d is the
sauter mean diameter. And the hold up is related to the
rate of mass transfer (W) via (a) by:
c a V K W . . . (2)
Wher K is the mass transfer coefficient, V is volume of
the column and c is the concentration driving force.
In solvent extraction the re lationship between mass
transfer and hydrodynamic performance is complex and
there are many types of contactors each requiring a
special understanding. Numerous experimental studies of
dispersed phase hold up, drop size, mass transfer and
mixing behavior within contactors have been reported
[1].
In order to determine the interfacial area of the
dispersion for the mass transfer calculation using
equation (2) either of the following should be known:
1. The drop residence time in the contactor.
2. The fraction of the column occupied by the dispersed
phase hold up.
In agitated contactors the residence time distribution is
rather complex and dispersed phase hold up is therefore
usually used for the estimation of interfacial area.
Virmijs and Karmers [2] investigated performance of
RDC for various values of the rotor speed, total through
put and solvent to feed ratio by comparing the separating
efficiency with the fractional volume of the dispersed
University of Baghdad
College of Engineering
Iraqi Journal of Chemical
and Petroleum Engineering

Prediction of fractional hold up in RDC column using artificial neural networks
IJCPE Vol.8 No.4 (December 2007) 32
phase under the same circumstances it was found that
under certain condition the efficiency decreases although
the hold up of the dispersed phase increases. This effect
is ascribed to back mixing in continuous phase due to
entrainment by the dispersed phase.
The hold up increased by increasing the solvent to feed
ratio while the total through put is kept constant, and the
special kind of back mixing in the continuous phase
impairs the efficiency of the extraction operation.
Logsdail et.al [3] were the first to introduce the concept
of dispersed phase hold up for the characterization of
column design these authors modified the concept of
relating the slip velocity
s
v of the dispersed phase to the
hold up in a two phase system by:
x
v
x
v
v
c d
s

+
1
(3)
( )
x
v
x
v
x v
c d
o

+
1
1 (4)
o
v is called the characteristic velocity and is defined as
the mean velocity of the droplets extrapolated to
essentially zero flow rates at a fixed rotor speed. Many
correlations have been published relating the dispersed
phase hold- up to the characteristic velocity in the form of
equation 4 with additional factors for column size
constriction and droplets coalescence and break up which
could not be easily applied due to the amount of
information required specially for
o
v . Some selected
reliable correlations are given in table (1). However these
correlations fail to predict hold up over a wide range of
conditions. Thus this work was initiated in order to
develop a general correlation using artificial neural
network.

Artificial Neural Network (ANN)
From an engineering view point ANN can be viewed as
non linear empirical models that are especially useful in
Adel Al-Hemiri and Suhayla Akkar
IJCPE Vol.8 No.4 (December 2007) 33
representing input -output data. Making predication,
classifying data, reorganization patterns, and control
process. ANN which will be referred to as a node in this
work and is analogous to a single neuron in the human
brain. The advantages of using artificial neural network
in contrast with first principles models or other empirical
models are [4-6],
1. ANN can be highly non linear.
2. The structure can be more complex and hence more
representative than most other empirical models.
3. The structure does not have to be prespecified.
4. Quite flexible models.
(ANN) have been increasingly applied to many
problems in transport planning and engineering, and the
feed forward network with the error back propagation
learning rule, usually called simply Back propagation
(Bp), has been the most popular neural network [7].

Back-propagation
Back propagation was one of the first general
techniques developed to train multi-layer networks,
which does not have many of the inherent limitations of
the earlier, single -layer neural nets. A back propagation
net is a multilayer, feed forward network that is trained
by back propagating the errors using the generalized
Delta rule [8].
The steps for back- propagation training can be shown
as follows [9]:
1. Initialize the weights with small, random values.
2. Each input unit broadcasts its value to all of the hidden
units.
3. Each hidden unit sums its input signals and applies its
activation function to compute its output signal.
4. Each hidden unit sends its signal to the output units.
5. Each output unit sums its input signals and applies its
activation function to compute its output signal.
6. Each-output unit updates its weights and bias:
The conventional algorithm used for training a MLFF
is the Bp algorithm, which is an iterative gradient
algorithm designed to minimize the mean-squared error
between the desired output and the actual output for a
particular input to the network [10]. Basically, Bp
learning consists of two passes through the different
layers of the network: a forward pass and backward pass.
During the forward pass the synaptic weights of the
network are all fixed. During the backward pass, on the
other hand, the synaptic weights are all adjusted in
accordance with an error-correction rule [11].
The algorithm of the error back-propagation training is
as given below [10]:
Step 1: initialize network weight values.
Step 2: sum weighted input and apply activation function
to compute output of hidden layer


1
]
1

i
ij i j
W x f h (4)
Where, h
j
: The actual output of hidden neuron j for input
signals X.
X
i
: Input signal of input neuron (i).
W
ij
: Synaptic weights between input neuron hidden
neuron j and i.
f : The activation function.

Step3: sum weighted output of hidden layer and apply
activation function to compute output of output
layer.
1
]
1

j
jk j k
W h f O (5)
Where O
k
: The actual output of output neuron k.
W
jk
: Synaptic weight between hidden neuron j and output
neuron k.

Step 4: Compute back propagation error
( )

,
_

j
jk j k k k
W h f O d ' (6)
Where f: The derivative of the activation function.
d
k
: The desired of output neuron k.

Step 5: Calculate weight correlation term
( ) ( ) 1 + n W h n W
jk j k jk
(7)

Step 6: Sums delta input for each hidden unit and
calculate error term.
( )

ij i jk k j
W X f W ' (8)
Step 7: Calculate weight correction term
( ) ( ) 1 + n W X n W
ij i j ij
(9)
Step 8: Update weights
( ) ( ) ( ) n W n W n W
jk jk jk
+ +1 (10)
Step 9: Repeat step 2 for a given number of error
( )
1
]
1

p k
p
k
p
k
O d
p
MSE
2
2
1

Where p is the number of patterns in the training set.
Step 10: End
Bp is easy to implement, and has been shown to produce
relatively good results in many applications. It is capable
of approximating arbitrary non-linear mappings.
Prediction of fractional hold up in RDC column using artificial neural networks
IJCPE Vol.8 No.4 (December 2007) 34
However, it is noted that two serious disadvantages in the
Bp algorithm are the slow rate of convergence, requiring
very long training times, and getting stuck in local
minima. The success of Bp methods very much depends
on problem specific parameter settings and on the
topology of the network [9].

The Activation Function used with the Back-
Propagation
There are three transfer functions most commonly used for
back propagation, but other differentiable transfer functions
can be created and used with back propagation if desired.
These functions are tansig, logsig, and purelin. The function
logsig generates outputs between 0 and 1 as the neuron's net
input goes from negative to positive infinity. Alternatively,
multilayer networks may use the tan sigmoid transfer
function. Occasionally, the linear transfer function purelin is
used in back propagation networks. [8].
If the last layer of a multilayer network has sigmoid
neurons, then the outputs of the network are limited to a
small range. If linear output neurons are used the network
outputs can take any value. In the present simulation the
tansig is used.

Modeling Correlation of ANN
The modeling of ANN correlation began with the
collection of large data bank followed by the learning file
which was made by randomly selecting about 70% of the
data base to train the network. The remaining 30% of
data is then used to check the generalization capability of
the model. The last step is to perform a neural correlation
and to validate it statistically. So that the steps of
modeling are:-

Collection of Data
The first step is collection of data.. Many
investigators studied the hydrodynamics of RDC based
on the dispersed phase hold up. In this model about 611
experimental points have been collected for mass transfer
from continuous to dispersed phase (c>d), for mass
transfer from dispersed to continuous (d>c) and for the
case of no mass transfer in RDC. The data were divided
into training and test sets: the neural network was trained
on 70% of the data and tested on 30%. The data includes
nine chemical systems with a large range of rotary speed,
velocity of both continuous and dispersed phase as well
as the physical properties for each chemical system. All
of these parameters are input to neural network and there
is one output; it is the hold up of dispersed phase.

The Structure of Artificial Neural Network
In this work, a multilayer neural network has been
used, as it is effective in finding complex non-linear
relationships. It has been reported that mu ltilayer ANN
models with only one hidden layer are universal
approximates. Hence, a three layer feed forward neural
network is chosen as a correlation model. The weighting
coefficients of the neural network are calculated using
MATLAB programming. Structure of artificial neural
network built as:-
1. Input layer: A layer of neurons that receive information
from external sources and pass this information to the
network for processing. These may be either sensory
inputs or signals from other systems outside the one
being modeled. In this work six input neurons in the
layer and there is a set of (427) data points available for
the training set.
2. Hidden layer: A layer of neurons that receives
information from the input layer and processes them in
a hidden way. It has no direct connections to the
outside world (inputs or output). All connections from
the hidden layer are to other layers within the system.
The number of neuron in the hidden layer is twenty one
neurons. This gave best results and was found by trial
and error. If the number of neurons in the hidden layer
is more, the network becomes complicated. Results
probably indicate that, the present problem is not too
complex to have a complicated network routing.
Hence, the results can be satisfactorily achieved by
keeping the number of neurons in hidden layer at a best
value of twenty one neurons.
3. Output layer: A layer of one neuron that receives
processed information and sends output signals out of
the system. Here the output is the hold up of dispersed
phase in RDC.
4. Bias: The function of the bias is to provide a threshold
for activation of neurons. The bias input is connected
to each of hidden neurons in network.
The structure of muiti layer ANN modeling is
illustrated in figure (1).



















Adel Al-Hemiri and Suhayla Akkar
IJCPE Vol.8 No.4 (December 2007) 35
Training of Artificial Neural Network
The training phase starts with randomly chosen initial
weight values. Then a back-propagation algorithm is
applied after each iteration, the weights are modified so
that the cumulative error decreases. In back-propagation,
the weight changes are proportional to the negative
gradient of error. More details about this learning
algorithm is shown in figure (1). Back-propagation may
have an excellent performance. This algorithm is used to
calculate the values of the weights and the following
procedure is then used (called "supervised learning") to
determine the values of weights of the network: -
1. For a given ANN architecture, the value of the weights
in the network is initialized as small random numbers.
2. The input of the training set is sent to the network and
resulting outputs are calculated.
3. The measure of the error between the outputs of the
network and the known correct (target) values is
calculated.
4. The gradients of the objective function with respect to
each of the individual weights are calculated.
5. The weights are changed according to the optimization
search direction.
6. The procedure returns to step 2.
7. The iteration terminates when the value of the
objective function calculated using the data in the test
approaches experimental value.
The trial and error to find the best ANN correlation
model is shown in table 2.

Table (2) Network parameters in ANN model
Network Parameters

Structure

MSE

No. of
iteration

Learning
rate

Momentum
coefficient

Transfer
function

[6-16-1]

0.1

2590

0.7

0.9

Tan sigmoid

[6-18-1]

0.01

4321

0.65

0.9

Tan sigmoid

[6-21-1]

0.0001

9103

0.75

0.9

Tan sigmoid


With reduced MSE (Mean Square Error) the network is
more accurate, because MSE is defined as:
( )
1
]
1

p k
p
k
p
k
O d
p
MSE
2
2
1
(13)
Where p is the number of patterns in training set, k is
the number of iterations,
p
k
d is the desired output,
p
k
O
is the actual output.
The learning process includes the procedure when the
data from the input neurons is propagated through the
network via the interconnections. Each neuron in a layer
is connected to every neuron in adjacent layers. A scalar
weight is associated with each interconnection.
Neurons in the hidden layers receive weighted inputs
from each of the neurons in the previous layer and they
sum the weighted inputs to the neuron and then pass the
resulting summation through a non-linear activation
function (tan sigmoid function).
Artificial neural networks learn patterns can be equated
to determining the proper values of the connection
strengths (i.e. the weight matrices w
h
and w
o
illustrated in
figure 1) that allow all the nodes to achieve the correct
state of activation for a given pattern of inputs. The
matrix, bias, and vector, given equations (14), (15), and
(16) illustrate the result of coefficient weights for ANN
correlation , where wl is the matrix containing the weight
vectors for the nodes in the hidden layer, W
o
is the vector
containing the weight for the nodes in the output layer
and is the bias.







(14)
















(15)









(16)




Prediction of fractional hold up in RDC column using artificial neural networks
IJCPE Vol.8 No.4 (December 2007) 36
Simulation Results
The network architecture used for predicting hold up is
illustrated in figure (1) consist of six inputs neurons
corresponding to the state variables of the system, with
21 hidden neurons and one output neuron. All neurons in
each layer were fully connected to the neurons in an
adjacent layer. The prediction of ANN correlation result
is plotted in figure (2) compares the predicted hold up
with experimental hold up for training set


Figure (2) Comparison between experimental and
predicted hold up in training set


Figure (3) Comparison between experimental and
predicted hold up in testing set

Test of the Proposed ANN
The purely empirical model was tested on data that
were not used to train the neural network and yielded
very accurate predictions. Having completed the
successful training, another data set was employed to test
the network prediction hold up. We made use of the same
model to generate (184) new data values. The result of
prediction is plotted with experimental values as shown
in figure (3).

Statistical Analysis
Statistical analysis based on the test data is calculated
to validate the accuracy of the output for pervious
correlation model based on ANN. The structure for each
model should give the best output prediction, which is
checked by using statistical analysis. The statistical
analysis of prediction is based on the following criteria:

1. The AARE (Average Absolute Relative Error) should
be minimum:

N
erimental
erimental prediction
x
x x
N
AARE
1 exp
exp 1
(17)

Where N here is the number of data points. x is the hold
up.
2. The standard deviation should be minimum.

( ) [ ]

1
/
2
exp exp
N
AARE x x x
SD
erimental erimental prediction
(18)
3. The correlation coefficient R between input and output
should be around unity.
( )( )
( ) ( )

N
i
prediction prediction
N
i
erimental erimental
N
i
prediction i prediction erimental i erimental
x x x x
x x x x
R
1
2
1
2
exp exp
1
) ( exp ) ( exp
(19)

Where
erimental
x
exp
=hold up mean of experimental points,
prediction
x =hold up mean for prediction points.

The literature correlations (in table 1) were used to
estimate the hold up. These correlations show a poor
agreement between the prediction and experimental hold
up value compared with ANN correlation. Table (3) gives
information of comparing these correlation with ANN
prediction in testing set.


Table (3) Comparison of ANN and previous literature
correlations in testing set
Correlation AARE% S.D% R
Kastkin(1962) 51.93 32.55 0.695
Murakami(1978) 41.29 23.94 0.7914
Hartland(1987) 32.79 22.59 0.778
Kalaichelvi(1998) 32 27.63 0.726
ANN (this work) 6.52 9.21 0.998

Adel Al-Hemiri and Suhayla Akkar
IJCPE Vol.8 No.4 (December 2007) 37
Conclusions
The ANN correlation shows noticeable improvement in
the prediction of dispersed phase hold up. The neural
network correlation yield an AARE of 6.52% and
standard deviation of 9.21%, which is better than those,
obtained for the selected literature correlations. Also
ANN correlation yielded improved predictions for variety
of liquid systems and a wide range of operating
parameters. The number of input units and output units
are fixed to a problem (here, 6 and 1 respectively) but the
choice of the number of the hidden units is flexible. In
this work best results were obtained employing 21 hidden
neurons.
Nomenclature
a Interfacial mass transfer area m
2
/m
3

b Bias
c
Concentration driving force kg/m
3

32
d
Sauter mean diameter
D
r
Diameter of rotary disk m
D
s
Stator ring opening m
D
t
Diameter of RDC column M
f The activation function
f' The derivation of the activation function
g Gravitational constant m/s
2

h
i
The actual output of hidden neuron j
K Mass transfer coefficient` m/s
n Number of input neurons
N Speed of rotor dist rps
O
k
The actual output of neuron k
P The number of patterns in the training set
R Correlation coefficient
V Volume of column m
3
v
c
Velocity of continuous phase m/s
v
d
Velocity of dispersed phase m/s
v
o
Characteristic velocity m/s
v
s
Slip velocity m/s
W Rate of mass transfer kg/s
W
ij
Synaptic weights between input and hidden
neuron

W
j k
Synaptic weights between input and output
neuron

x Hold up
X
i
Input vector
x
Mean hold up
z
c
Height of compartment m
z
t
Height of RDC column M
Greek symbols
Momentum to accelerate the network
convergence process

k

The error term
The learning rate
Viscosity kg/m.s
Interfacial tension N/m
Density kg/m
3


Density difference kg/m
3

Subscripts
c Continuous phase
d Dispersed phase

References
1. Bailes, P.J., Gledhill, J., Godfrey, J.C and Slater, M.J,
"Hydrodynamic behavior of packed, rotating disc
contactor, and Kuhn", Chem. Eng. Res. Des, 64, 43-55,
(1986).
2. Vermijs, H.J., and Kramers, H., "Liquid-liquid
extraction in rotating disc contactor", Chem. Eng. Sci.,
3, 55-64, (1954).
3. Logsdail, D.H., Thomton, J.D., and Pratt, H.R.C.,
"liquid-liquid extraction part XII: flooding rates and
performance data for a rotating disc contactor", Trans.
Inst. Chem. Eng., 35, 301-315, (1957).
4. David M.H., "Applications of artificial neural networks
in chemical engineering", Korean. J. Chem. Eng., 17,
373-392, (2002).
5. Patterson, "Artificial neural networks theory and
applications". Prentice Hall, (1996).
6. Sivanadam, S.N., "Introduction to artificial neural
networks", Vikas publishing House Pvt. Ldt, (2003).
7. Freeman, J.A., and Skapura, D.M., "Neural networks",
Jordan University of Science and Technology, July
(1992).
8. MATLAB, Version 7, June 2003, "Neural network
toolbox"
9. Leonard, J., and Kramer, M.A., "Improvement of the
back-propagation algorithm for training neural
networks", Comp. Chem. Eng, 14, 337-341, (1990).
10. Lendaris, G., "Supervised learning in ANN from
introduction to artificial intelligence". New York,
April 7, (2004).
11. Lippmann, R.P., "An introduction to computing with
neural nets", IEEE Magazine, April, pp.4-22,(1987).
12. Kalaichelvi, P., Murugesan, T., "Dispersed phase
hold up in rotating disc co ntactor", Bioprocess
Engineering, 18,105-111, (1998).
13. Kasatkin, A.G., and Kagan, S.Z Appl., Chem.,
USSR, 35, 1903, (1962) [Cited in Murakami, A., and
Misonou, A., and Inoue, A., 1978].
14. Kumar, A., and Hartland, S., "Independent prediction
of slip velocity and hold up in liquid-liquid
extraction columns", Can. J. Chem. Eng., 67, 17,
(1987).
15. Murakam, A., Misonou, A., Inoue, K., " Dispersed
phase hold up in a rotating disc extraction column",
International Chemical Engineering, 18,1, (1978).